Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 1 of 33 Page ID #:202

1 Randall J. Sunshine (SBN 137363) [email protected] 2 Ryan E. Hatch (SBN 235577) [email protected] 3 Jason L. Haas (SBN 217290) [email protected] 4 LINER LLP 1100 Glendon Avenue, 14th Floor 5 Los Angeles, California 90024.3503 Telephone: (310) 500-3500 6 Facsimile: (310) 500-3501

7 Attorneys for Plaintiff SIGNAL IP, INC. 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10

11 SIGNAL IP, INC., a California Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) 12 corporation, FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 13 Plaintiff, FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

14 vs.

15 VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA, INC., d/b/a. AUDI OF JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 16 AMERICA, INC., a New Jersey corporation; BENTLEY MOTORS, 17 INC., a Delaware Corporation,

18 Defendants.

19 Plaintiff Signal IP, Inc. (“Signal IP” or “Plaintiff”) brings this First Amended 20 Complaint against Defendants Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., d/b/a Audi of 21 America, Inc. and Bentley Motors, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”), as permitted by 22 Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B), alleging as follows: 23 PARTIES 24 1. Plaintiff Signal IP is a California corporation with its principal place of 25 business at 11100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 380, Los Angeles, CA 90025. 26 2. On information and belief, Defendant Volkswagen Group of America, 27 Inc., d/b/a Audi of America, Inc. is a New Jersey corporation with its principal place 28

Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 2 of 33 Page ID #:203

1 of business at 2200 Ferdinand Porsche Drive, Herndon, VA 20171. 2 3. On information and belief, Defendant Bentley Motors, Inc. is a 3 Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 2200 Ferdinand Porsche 4 Drive, Herndon, VA 20171. 5 4. On information and belief, Defendants are part of an integrated 6 automotive group that manufactures and distributes cars under brand names 7 including “Audi”, “Volkswagen”, and “Bentley.” 8 JURISDICTION, VENUE AND JOINDER 9 5. This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of 10 the United States Code. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 11 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). 12 6. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants. Defendants have 13 conducted extensive commercial activities and continue to conduct extensive 14 commercial activities within the State of California. Defendants are registered to do 15 business in California. Additionally, on information and belief, Defendants, directly 16 and/or through intermediaries (including Defendants’ entities, subsidiaries, 17 distributors, sales agents, partners and others), distribute, offer for sale, sell, and/or 18 advertise their products (including but not limited to the products and services that 19 are accused of infringement in this lawsuit) in the United States, in the State of 20 California, and in this judicial district, under the “Audi”, “Volkswagen”, and 21 “Bentley” brand names. Defendants have purposefully and voluntarily placed one 22 or more of their infringing products and services into the stream of commerce with 23 the expectation that the products and services will be purchased or used by 24 customers in California and within this judicial district. Accordingly, Defendants 25 have infringed Signal IP’s patents within the State of California and in this judicial 26 district as alleged in more detail below. 27 7. Venue is proper in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b). 28

2 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 3 of 33 Page ID #:204

1 BACKGROUND 2 8. Signal IP, Inc. is a California corporation with a principal place of 3 business at 11100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 380, Los Angeles, CA 90025. It is the 4 owner of the entire right, title and interest in and to U.S. Patent Nos. 5,714,927; 5 5,732,375; 5,954,775; 6,012,007; 6,434,486; and 6,775,601 (the “Patents-in-Suit”), 6 including the right to recover for past, present and future infringement. 7 9. On information and belief, Defendants are direct or indirect 8 subsidiaries of global car manufacturer and distributor Volkswagen AG, which is 9 headquartered in Germany. Volkswagen AG manufactures and distributes cars 10 under brand names including “Audi”, “Volkswagen”, and “Bentley.” 11 10. Defendants have knowledge of each of the Patents-in-Suit, and have 12 had the specific knowledge that their products and services described below infringe 13 the Patents-in-Suit, since at least the filing of the complaint in this action on April 14 23, 2014, which was served on Defendants on April 30, 2014. Signal IP gives and 15 has given Defendants notice of its infringement of the Patents-in-Suit. 16 11. Signal IP has also already served Defendants with its Asserted Claims 17 and Infringement Contentions pursuant to Standing Patent Rule §§ 2.1 and 2.2 (the 18 “Infringement Contentions”), on July 8, 2014. The Infringement Contentions 19 provide Defendants with notice of each claim of each patent in suit that is 20 infringing, and separately for each asserted claim, identify each accused 21 instrumantality in a manner that is as specific as is reasonably possible. The 22 Infringement Contentions also identify specifically where each limititation of each 23 asserted claim is found within each accused instrumentality, and identify the basis 24 for Signal IP’s allegations of willful infringement. The Infringement Contentions 25 set forth Signal IP’s allegations of infringement in this matter. 26 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF 27 (Infringement of the ‘927 Patent) 28 12. Plaintiff incorporates all previous paragraphs of this complaint as if set

3 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 4 of 33 Page ID #:205

1 forth in full herein. 2 13. Signal IP is the owner of the entire right, title, and interest in and to 3 U.S. Patent No. 5,714,927 (the ‘927 Patent), entitled “Method of Improving Zone of 4 Coverage Response of Automotive Radar.” The ‘927 Patent was duly and legally 5 issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on February 3, 1998. A true and 6 correct copy of the ‘927 Patent is attached as Exhibit A. 7 14. On information and belief, Defendants have been and are directly 8 infringing, inducing others to infringe, and/or contributorily infringing, literally, 9 under the doctrine of equivalents, and/or jointly, one or more claims of the ‘927 10 Patent, including, but not limited to, claims 1, 2 and 6 (“the ‘927 Patent Asserted 11 Claims”), in the State of California, in this judicial district, and elsewhere in the 12 United States by, among other things, importing, making, using, offering for sale, 13 and/or selling in the United States certain methods or systems disclosed and claimed 14 in the ‘927 Patent, including, but not limited to, the Active Blind Spot Assist 15 system, used in products including, but not limited to, to the Audi A3, A4, A4 16 Allroad, A4 Sedan/Avant, A5, A6, A7, A8, Q3, Q5, Q7, Q5 Hybrid, S4, S5, S5 17 Cabriolet, S6, S7, S8, SQ5, RS5, and RS7, and the Volkswagen CC, Touareg, 18 Phaeton, and Touareg Hybrid (collectively, the accused products and features are 19 referred to herein as “the ‘927 Patent Accused Instrumentalities,” although the 20 accused instrumentalities and asserted claims have been formally identified in 21 Signal IP’s Infringement Contentions). 22 15. The ‘927 Patent Accused Instrumentalities are described or have been 23 described at least in part online at: 24 http://www.audiusanews.com/newsrelease.do?&id=2757&allImage=1&teaser=drive 25 r-assistance-systems∣ and 26 http://en.volkswagen.com/en/innovation-and-technology/technical- 27 glossary/spurwechselassistentsideassist.html. 28 16. As described below in and in the Infringement Contentions,

4 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 5 of 33 Page ID #:206

1 Volkswagen includes a radar system where a host vehicle uses radar to detect a 2 target vehicle in a blind spot of the host vehicle driver which improves the perceived 3 zone of coverage response of automotive radar. Volkswagen determines the relative 4 speed of the host and target vehicles and selects a variable sustain time as a function 5 of relative vehicle speed. Volkswagen detects target vehicle presence and produces 6 an alert command. Volkswagen activates an alert signal in response to the alert 7 command. At the end of the alert command, Volkswagen determines whether the 8 alert signal was active for a threshold time and if the alert signal was active for the 9 threshold time, Volkswagen sustains the alert signal for the variable sustain time; 10 where the zone of coverage appears to increase according to the variable sustain 11 time. 12 17. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, Defendants’ Side 13 Assist system “monitors traffic behind the vehicle and warns the driver of critical 14 lane changes as necessary” through the use of “[t]wo radar systems at the rear 15 [which] scan the areas up to around 50 metres behind the vehicle and in the blind 16 spots to the sides.” 17 18. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “[t]he Side 18 Assist] system begins to operate at a speed of about 30 km/h (18.64 mph).” At that 19 speed, a computer evaluates the data from the rear radar sensors. If the sensors 20 “detect another vehicle that is in the critical zone – that is, traveling in the blind spot 21 or quickly approaching from behind – the information stage is activated.” 22 19. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “Side Assist 23 signals any vehicle which is in the critical zone for a lane change, regardless of 24 whether a lane change is in progress or not. (¶ ) The system draws the driver’s 25 attention to the potential danger with a light that comes on in the exterior mirror on 26 the side in question. (¶ ) If the driver nevertheless signals to change lane, the same 27 LED light starts to flash more brightly and draws attention to the danger.” 28 20. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “[i]nstead of

5 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 6 of 33 Page ID #:207

1 distracting the driver with unnecessary warnings, allowance is always made for the 2 relative difference in vehicle speeds. Side Assist only gives a warning for vehicles 3 that could actually be a risk if the driver were to make a lane change.” 4 21. In addition to their own direct infringement, Defendants have also been 5 and are inducing and/or contributing to the direct infringement of the ‘927 Patent by 6 at least, but not limited to, customers of Defendants, partners of Defendants, and/or 7 end-users of Defendants’ products, including, but not limited to, the ‘927 Patent 8 Accused Instrumentalities (“the ‘927 Patent Third Party Infringers”), who directly 9 implement, use or otherwise participate in the use of the ‘927 Patent Accused 10 Instrumentalities, which have no substantial non-infringing uses, by at least the 11 following affirmative acts: (1) advertising in public and marketing the features, 12 benefits and availability of the ‘927 Patent Accused Instrumentalities; (2) promoting 13 the adoption and use of the ‘927 Accused Instrumentalities; and (3) providing 14 instructions on how to use the ‘927 Patent Accused Instrumentalities. 15 22. Defendants indirectly infringe by actively, knowingly, and/or 16 intentionally inducing or contributing to infringement of one or more of the claims 17 of the ‘927 Patent, including, but not limited to, the ‘927 Patent Asserted Claims, by 18 a third party, including, but not limited to, the ‘927 Patent Third Party Infringers, 19 who directly implement, use or otherwise participate in the use of the ‘927 Patent 20 Accused Instrumentalities. On information and belief, Defendants actively, 21 knowingly, and/or intentionally induce the use of the ‘927 Patent Accused 22 Instrumentalities by the ‘927 Patent Third Party Infringers, and provide or otherwise 23 implement material components of one or more claims of the ‘927 Patent, including, 24 but not limited to, the ‘927 Patent Asserted Claims, which were especially made or 25 adapted for use in the infringement of the ‘927 Patent claims, including, but not 26 limited to, the ‘927 Patent Asserted Claims, and are not a staple article or 27 commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses. Defendants 28 know and have known that the combination for which their infringing components,

6 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 7 of 33 Page ID #:208

1 including, but not limited to, the ‘927 Patent Accused Instrumentalities, were 2 especially made or adapted are both patented and infringing. 3 23. Defendants’ infringement of the ‘927 Patent has been and continues to 4 be willful, rendering this case exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285. 5 With knowledge of the Patents-in-Suit, as described above, Defendants have 6 continued their infringing actions, as described above, despite an objectively high 7 likelihood (and affirmative allegations) that these actions constitute infringement of 8 the Patents-in-Suit. This objectively defined risk was known to Defendants, and so 9 obvious that it should have been known to Defendants. 10 24. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff 11 has suffered, and will continue to suffer, irreparable injury for which it has no 12 adequate remedy at law. Plaintiff also has been damaged and, until an injunction 13 issues, will continue to be damaged in an amount yet to be determined. 14 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF 15 (Infringement of the ‘375 Patent) 16 25. Plaintiff incorporates all previous paragraphs of this complaint as if set 17 forth in full herein. 18 26. Signal IP is the owner of the entire right, title, and interest in and to 19 U.S. Patent No. 5,732,375 (the ‘375 Patent), entitled “Method of Inhibiting or 20 Allowing Airbag Deployment.” The ‘375 Patent was duly and legally issued by the 21 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on March 24, 1998. A true and correct copy of 22 the ‘375 Patent is attached as Exhibit B. 23 27. On information and belief, Defendants have been and are directly 24 infringing, inducing others to infringe, and/or contributorily infringing, literally, 25 under the doctrine of equivalents, and/or jointly, one or more claims of the ‘375 26 Patent, including, but not limited to, claims 1 and 7 (“the ‘375 Patent Asserted 27 Claims”), in the State of California, in this judicial district, and elsewhere in the 28 United States by, among other things, importing, making, using, offering for sale,

7 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 8 of 33 Page ID #:209

1 and/or selling in the United States certain methods or systems disclosed and claimed 2 in the ‘375 Patent, including, but not limited to, the Seat Occupancy Sensor, used in 3 products including but not limited to the Audi A6 and S6 (collectively, the accused 4 products and features are referred to herein as “the ‘375 Patent Accused 5 Instrumentalities,” although the accused instrumentalities and asserted claims have 6 been formally identified in Signal IP’s Infringement Contentions). 7 28. The ‘375 Patent Accused Instrumentalities are described or have been 8 described at least in part online at: 9 http://www.volkspage.net/technik/ssp/ssp/SSP_361.pdf; and 10 http://parts.audiusa.com/parts/2011/Audi/A6%20Quattro/Avant?siteid=16&vehiclei 11 d=314382&diagram=1352455&diagramCallOut=25. 12 29. As described below and in the Infringement Contentions, the Audi Seat 13 Occupancy Sensor (“SOS”) provides airbag control in a vehicle having an array of 14 force sensors on the passenger seat coupled to a controller for determining whether 15 to allow airbag deployment based on sensed force. SOS measures the force detected 16 by each sensor and calculates the total force of the sensor array. SOS allows 17 deployment if the total force is above a total threshold force. SOS defines a plurality 18 of seat areas, and has at least one sensor located in each seat area. SOS determines 19 the existence of a local pressure area when the calculated total force is concentrated 20 in one of said seat areas. SOS calculates a local force as the sum of forces sensed by 21 each sensor located in the seat area in which the total force is concentrated. SOS 22 allows deployment if the local force is greater than a predefined seat area threshold 23 force. 24 30. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “[t]he front 25 passenger side seat occupied sensor consists of a plastic film incorporating several 26 individual pressure sensors. The front passenger side seat occupied sensor is located 27 in the front passenger seat, between the seat cover and padding. The seat occupied 28 sensor extends across the rear part of the front passenger seat and is positioned such

8 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 9 of 33 Page ID #:210

1 that the relevant area of the seat surface is monitored.” 2 31. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “[t]he seat 3 occupied recognition control unit J706 evaluates the signals from the pressure 4 sensor for seat occupied recognition G452. …Based on the signal from the pressure 5 sensor for seat occupied recognition, the seat occupied recognition control unit 6 determines the load on the front passenger seat.” 7 32. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “[d]epending on 8 the load, the resistance value of the front passenger side seat occupied sensor is 9 modified. When the front passenger seat is not occupied, the resistance value of the 10 front passenger side seat occupied sensor G128 is high. As the load increases, the 11 resistance value falls. Above a load of approx. 5 kg, the airbag control unit detects 12 ‘seat occupied’." 13 33. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, for the “[f]ront 14 passenger side seat occupied sensor”, “[i]f the airbag control unit J234 receives the 15 information that the front passenger seat is not occupied or that a child seat is 16 installed, the airbag control unit switches off the front passenger airbag.” 17 34. In addition to their own direct infringement, Defendants have also been 18 and are inducing and/or contributing to the direct infringement of the ‘375 Patent by 19 at least, but not limited to, customers of Defendants, partners of Defendants, and/or 20 end-users of Defendants’ products, including, but not limited to, the ‘375 Patent 21 Accused Instrumentalities (“the ‘375 Patent Third Party Infringers”), who directly 22 implement, use or otherwise participate in the use of the ‘375 Patent Accused 23 Instrumentalities, which have no substantial non-infringing uses, by at least the 24 following affirmative acts: (1) advertising in public and marketing the features, 25 benefits and availability of the ‘375 Patent Accused Instrumentalities; (2) promoting 26 the adoption and use of the ‘375 Accused Instrumentalities; and (3) providing 27 instructions on how to use the ‘375 Patent Accused Instrumentalities. 28 35. Defendants indirectly infringe by actively, knowingly, and/or

9 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 10 of 33 Page ID #:211

1 intentionally inducing or contributing to infringement of one or more of the claims 2 of the ‘375 Patent, including, but not limited to, the ‘375 Patent Asserted Claims, by 3 a third party, including, but not limited to, the ‘375 Patent Third Party Infringers, 4 who directly implement, use or otherwise participate in the use of the ‘375 Patent 5 Accused Instrumentalities. On information and belief, Defendants actively, 6 knowingly, and/or intentionally induce the use of the ‘375 Patent Accused 7 Instrumentalities by the ‘375 Patent Third Party Infringers, and provide or otherwise 8 implement material components of one or more claims of the ‘375 Patent, including, 9 but not limited to, the ‘375 Patent Asserted Claims, which were especially made or 10 adapted for use in the infringement of the ‘375 Patent claims, including, but not 11 limited to, the ‘375 Patent Asserted Claims, and are not a staple article or 12 commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses. Defendants 13 know and have known that the combination for which their infringing components, 14 including, but not limited to, the ‘375 Patent Accused Instrumentalities, were 15 especially made or adapted are both patented and infringing. 16 36. Defendants’ infringement of the ‘375 Patent has been and continues to 17 be willful, rendering this case exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285. 18 With knowledge of the Patents-in-Suit, as described above, Defendants have 19 continued their infringing actions, as described above, despite an objectively high 20 likelihood (and affirmative allegations) that these actions constitute infringement of 21 the Patents-in-Suit. This objectively defined risk was known to Defendants, and so 22 obvious that it should have been known to Defendants. 23 37. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendants will continue to infringe the 24 ‘375 Patent. 25 38. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff 26 has suffered, and will continue to suffer, irreparable injury for which it has no 27 adequate remedy at law. Plaintiff also has been damaged and, until an injunction 28 issues, will continue to be damaged in an amount yet to be determined.

10 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 11 of 33 Page ID #:212

1 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF 2 (Infringement of the ‘486 Patent) 3 39. Plaintiff incorporates all previous paragraphs of this complaint as if set 4 forth in full herein. 5 40. Signal IP is the owner of the entire right, title, and interest in and to 6 U.S. Patent No. 6,434,486 (the ‘486 Patent), entitled “Technique for Limiting the 7 Range of an Object Sensing System in a Vehicle.” The ‘486 Patent duly and legally 8 issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on August 13, 2002. A true and 9 correct copy of the ‘486 Patent is attached as Exhibit C. 10 41. On information and belief, Defendants have been and are directly 11 infringing, inducing others to infringe, and/or contributorily infringing, literally, 12 under the doctrine of equivalents, and/or jointly, one or more claims of the ‘486 13 Patent, including, but not limited to, claims 21, 26, and 28 (“the ‘486 Patent 14 Asserted Claims”), in the State of California, in this judicial district, and elsewhere 15 in the United States by, among other things, importing, making, using, offering for 16 sale, and/or selling in the United States certain methods or systems disclosed and 17 claimed in the ‘486 Patent, including, but not limited to the (1) Adaptive Cruise 18 Control system, used in products including but not limited to the Audi A3, A4, A4 19 Allroad, A4 Sedan/Avant, A5, A6, A7, A8, Q3, Q5, Q7, Q5 Hybrid, S4, S5, S5 20 Cabriolet, S6, S7, S8, and SQ5; and (2) the Front Assist system, used in products 21 including but not limited to the Volkswagen CC, Eos, Golf, Golf GTI, Golf R, Jetta, 22 Jetta Sedan, Jetta SportWagen, Passat Sedan, Passat Wagon, Touareg, Jetta Hybrid, 23 Phaeton, and Touareg Hybrid (collectively, the accused products and features are 24 referred to herein as “the ‘486 Patent Accused Instrumentalities,” although the 25 accused instrumentalities and asserted claims have been formally identified in 26 Signal IP’s Infringement Contentions). 27 42. The ‘486 Patent Accused Instrumentalities are described or have been 28 described at least in part online at:

11 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 12 of 33 Page ID #:213

1 http://www.audi.co.uk/new-cars/a6/a6-saloon/driver-assistants/adaptive-cruise- 2 control.html; 3 http://www.audi.cn/cn/brand/en/tools/advice/glossary/adaptive_cruise_control.brow 4 ser.filter_i_a.html; 5 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUMhyo9vLJs; 6 http://www.audi.com/cn/brand/en/models/a7/a7_sportback/configure/safety.html#so 7 urce=http://www.audi.com/cn/brand/en/models/a7/a7_sportback/configure/safety.de 8 tailview.Level1_0002_Level2_0004.html&container=layerModal; 9 http://forum.a8parts.co.uk/attachment.php?attachmentid=4812&d=1348136382; 10 http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/technology/proximity-sensing/front-assist; 11 http://en.volkswagen.com/en/innovation-and-technology/technical- 12 glossary/umfeldbeobachtungssystem_front_assist.html; 13 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfNEy8H0qEA; 14 http://training.avme.net/admin/Upload/SSP/4888_374%20%20Concern%20Traction 15 %20Control.pdf; 16 http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/71/28/78/PDF/mtnsxausa2012.pdf; and 17 http://www.volkswagen.co.th/en/technology/assistance-systems/front-assist.html. 18 43. As described below and in the Infringement Contentions, Audi limits 19 the range of an object sensing system such that certain objects detected by the 20 sensing system that are not in a vehicle path do not cause the sensing system to 21 provide an alarm. Audi determines a desired warning distance based upon the 22 current steering angle. Audi determines a current distance to a sensed object. Audi 23 provides an alarm only if the sensed object is within the desired warning distance. 24 As further described below, Volkswagen limits the range of an object sensing 25 system such that certain objects detected by the sensing system that are not in a 26 vehicle path do not cause the sensing system to provide an alarm. Volkswagen 27 determines a desired warning distance based upon the current steering angle. 28 Volkswagen determines a current distance to a sensed object. Volkswagen provides

12 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 13 of 33 Page ID #:214

1 an alarm only if the sensed object is within the desired warning distance. 2 44. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, the “Adaptive 3 cruise control builds on a standard cruise control system and allows the driver to 4 maintain a set distance from the vehicle in front. It uses a radar sensor to measure 5 the distance from the vehicle ahead. If the distance is too small, the system reduces 6 speed moderately by easing the throttle or it automatically activates the brakes. 7 Once the road ahead is clear again, adaptive cruise control accelerates the car back 8 up to your previous speed. Using the satellite navigation system, the Adaptive 9 cruise control knows exactly where the car is, so if travelling on a motorway and the 10 car in front brakes and indicates left (because the driver wants to take the next exit) 11 the system can recognise this - thanks to the camera image and because it sees the 12 exit on the navigation data. In this scenario a traditional radar based cruise control 13 system would brake, whereas the A6 would continue uninterrupted.” 14 45. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, the Adaptive 15 Cruise Control system “measures the distance to the vehicle ahead by means of a 16 special radar sensor and controls the speed, ensuring it does not exceed the set value. 17 In addition, adaptive cruise control automatically maintains a constant distance to 18 the vehicle ahead. If the driver’s intervention is required to sufficiently brake the 19 vehicle, a signal is automatically given. The driver can choose between four distance 20 programmes and adjust the system's dynamics to suit personal preferences: the range 21 of programmes comprises Distance 1 (sporty), Distances 2 and 3 (standard) and 22 Distance 4 (comfortable). Even when adaptive cruise control is activated, the driver 23 is still responsible for monitoring the car’s speed and the distance from the vehicle 24 in front. Adaptive cruise control does not react to stationary objects or approaching 25 vehicles.” 26 46. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, the “adaptive 27 cruise control uses a variety of data to track the vehicle in front of you, including the 28 steering angle.”

13 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 14 of 33 Page ID #:215

1 47. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “Even when the 2 road isn’t straight, Adaptive Cruise Control detects the correct vehicle to which it 3 must maintain a specified distance. To do this Adaptive Cruise Control interprets 4 various vehicle data, including the steering angle of the vehicle.” 5 48. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, the Adaptive 6 Cruise Control System “maintains a preselected speed or a specified distance from 7 the vehicle in front. In slow-moving traffic and congestion it governs braking, 8 acceleration and driving at walking pace. Radar sensors, a video camera and the 9 sensors for the parking aid monitor the area around the Audi A7 Sportback. If they 10 detect an obstruction, the driver is alerted by an acoustic signal and a visual display 11 in the driver information system.” 12 49. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “The Front Assist 13 ambient traffic monitoring system uses a radar sensor to detect situations where the 14 distance to the vehicle in front is critical and helps to reduce the vehicle’s stopping 15 distance. In dangerous situations the system alerts the driver by means of visual and 16 acoustic signals and with a warning jolt of the brakes. Front Assist operates 17 independently of the ACC automatic distance control.” 18 50. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “The traffic ahead 19 is monitored constantly by the radar at the front. If a vehicle is detected ahead of 20 you in the lane, the distance and the speed relative to it are calculated. If the gap is 21 closing too fast, Front Assist initially warns you by means of an audible as well as a 22 visual signal.” 23 51. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “The front assist 24 system is an assist system with a warning function, and serves to prevent rear-end 25 collisions. Stopping distance reduction AWV1 and stopping distance reduction 26 AWV2 form part of the front assist system. When a preceding vehicle is approached 27 in a hazardous manner, the front assist system has two action time points, the 28 preliminary warning and the main warning.”

14 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 15 of 33 Page ID #:216

1 52. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “Stopping 2 distance reduction 2 actively warns the driver of an impending rear-end collision. 3 The distance from and speed of a preceding vehicle are monitored by the control 4 unit for proximity control. If the preceding vehicle is approached too closely, the 5 system informs the driver in two stages, if the driver fails to respond to the 6 behaviour of the preceding vehicle within a specific time.” 7 53. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “If the driver does 8 not defuse the situation, the second warning is output. Brake pressure is temporarily 9 built up. The ABS/ESP control unit receives a braking request from the control unit 10 for cruise control via the CAN data bus and actuates either the active brake servo or 11 the return flow pump in the hydraulic unit. Braking is temporarily carried out. Due 12 to the brake jolt, the driver's attention is drawn to the risk of a collision. However, 13 the jolt does not reduce the vehicle speed.” 14 54. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “The ABS/ESP 15 control unit uses the data from the driver’s command to calculate the nominal 16 vehicle behaviour and the actual vehicle behaviour from the vehicle’s actual 17 movement…. The driver’s command is registered by: - The steering angle sender…. 18 The steering angle represents the driver’s direction command….” 19 55. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “Computational 20 Approaches for Avoidance Trajectories. Once an obstacle has been detected by 21 suitable sensors (e.g. radar, lidar), the following approaches can be used to decide in 22 the model whether a collision is going to happen or not.” 23 56. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “The vector z of 24 the state variables consists of the car’s center of gravity (x; y), yaw angle, yaw angle 25 rate w, velocities x0 = vx and y0 = vy in x- and y-direction, respectively, steering 26 angle….” 27 57. In addition to their own direct infringement, Defendants have also been 28 and are inducing and/or contributing to the direct infringement of the ‘486 Patent by

15 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 16 of 33 Page ID #:217

1 at least, but not limited to, customers of Defendants, partners of Defendants, and/or 2 end-users of Defendants’ products, including, but not limited to, the ‘486 Patent 3 Accused Instrumentalities (“the ‘486 Patent Third Party Infringers”), who directly 4 implement, use or otherwise participate in the use of the ‘486 Patent Accused 5 Instrumentalities, which have no substantial non-infringing uses, by at least the 6 following affirmative acts: (1) advertising in public and marketing the features, 7 benefits and availability of the ‘486 Patent Accused Instrumentalities; (2) promoting 8 the adoption and use of the ‘486 Accused Instrumentalities; and (3) providing 9 instructions on how to use the ‘486 Patent Accused Instrumentalities. 10 58. Defendants indirectly infringe by actively, knowingly, and/or 11 intentionally inducing or contributing to infringement of one or more of the claims 12 of the ‘486 Patent, including, but not limited to, the ‘486 Patent Asserted Claims, by 13 a third party, including, but not limited to, the ‘486 Patent Third Party Infringers, 14 who directly implement, use or otherwise participate in the use of the ‘486 Patent 15 Accused Instrumentalities. On information and belief, Defendants actively, 16 knowingly, and/or intentionally induce the use of the ‘486 Patent Accused 17 Instrumentalities by the ‘486 Patent Third Party Infringers, and provide or otherwise 18 implement material components of one or more claims of the ‘486 Patent, including, 19 but not limited to, the ‘486 Patent Asserted Claims, which were especially made or 20 adapted for use in the infringement of the ‘486 Patent claims, including, but not 21 limited to, the ‘486 Patent Asserted Claims, and are not a staple article or 22 commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses. Defendants 23 know and have known that the combination for which their infringing components, 24 including, but not limited to, the ‘486 Patent Accused Instrumentalities, were 25 especially made or adapted are both patented and infringing. 26 59. Defendants’ infringement of the ‘486 Patent has been and continues to 27 be willful, rendering this case exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285. 28 With knowledge of the Patents-in-Suit, as described above, Defendants have

16 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 17 of 33 Page ID #:218

1 continued their infringing actions, as described above, despite an objectively high 2 likelihood (and affirmative allegations) that these actions constitute infringement of 3 the Patents-in-Suit. This objectively defined risk was known to Defendants, and so 4 obvious that it should have been known to Defendants. 5 60. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendants will continue to infringe the 6 ‘486 Patent. 7 61. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff 8 has suffered, and will continue to suffer, irreparable injury for which it has no 9 adequate remedy at law. Plaintiff also has been damaged and, until an injunction 10 issues, will continue to be damaged in an amount yet to be determined. 11 FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 12 (Infringement of the ‘601 Patent) 13 62. Plaintiff incorporates all previous paragraphs of this complaint as if set 14 forth in full herein. 15 63. Signal IP is the owner of the entire right, title, and interest in and to 16 U.S. Patent No. 6,775,601 (the ‘601 Patent), entitled “Method and Control System 17 for Controlling Propulsion in a Hybrid Vehicle.” The ‘601 Patent was duly and 18 legally issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on August 10, 2004. A true 19 and correct copy of the ‘601 Patent is attached as Exhibit D. 20 64. On information and belief, Defendants have been and are directly 21 infringing, inducing others to infringe, and/or contributorily infringing, literally, 22 under the doctrine of equivalents, and/or jointly, one or more claims of the ‘601 23 Patent, including, but not limited to, claims 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15 and 17 (“the ‘601 24 Patent Asserted Claims”), in the State of California, in this judicial district, and 25 elsewhere in the United States by, among other things, importing, making, using, 26 offering for sale, and/or selling in the United States certain methods or systems 27 disclosed and claimed in the ‘601 Patent, including, but not limited to, the Audi Q5 28 Hybrid, and the Volkswagen Jetta Hybrid and Touareg Hybrid (collectively, the

17 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 18 of 33 Page ID #:219

1 accused products and features are referred to herein as “the ‘601 Patent Accused 2 Instrumentalities,” although the accused instrumentalities and asserted claims have 3 been formally identified in Signal IP’s Infringement Contentions). 4 65. The ‘601 Patent Accused Instrumentalities are described or have been 5 described at least in part online at: 6 http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1054666_technical-details-revealed-2012- 7 audi-q5-hybrid-crossover; 8 http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/11/audi-20101110-1.html; 9 http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/audi/q5/first-drives/audi-q5-hybrid; 10 http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/20955066#/20955066/4; 11 http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2013-volkswagen-jetta-hybrid-test-review; 12 http://www.leftlanenews.com/new-car-buying/volkswagen/touareg-hybrid/; 13 http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/03/business/la-fi-vw-touareg-hybrid-review- 14 20110203; 15 http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/first-drives/volkswagen-touareg-hybrid; and 16 http://www.hybridcars.com/volkswagen-touareg-hybrid/. 17 66. As described below and in the Infringement Contentions, Defendants 18 control a propulsion system in a hybrid vehicle including a traction motor and a 19 propulsion unit. Defendants map respective regions of relatively high and low 20 efficiency in an efficiency map for the propulsion unit. Defendants sense a signal 21 indicative of the regions of relatively high and low efficiency. During conditions 22 when the sensed signal indicates a region of low-efficiency for the propulsion unit, 23 Defendants generate a signal configured to activate the electric traction motor to 24 drivingly propel the vehicle while de-engaging the propulsion unit from propelling 25 the vehicle. During conditions when the sensed signal indicates a region of high- 26 efficiency for the propulsion unit, Defendants generate a signal configured to 27 deactivate the electric traction motor from drivingly propelling the vehicle while re- 28 engaging the propulsion unit to propel the vehicle.

18 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 19 of 33 Page ID #:220

1 67. According to public sources, “[t]he Q5 hybrid quattro, which goes into 2 production in 2011, is the first hybrid model from Audi with two drive systems. Its 3 gasoline engine, a 2.0 TFSI, and its electric motor are mounted directly behind one 4 another as a parallel hybrid system.” “[T]he new Q5 Hybrid uses a smaller 208- 5 horsepower, 2.0-liter direct-injected and turbocharged four-cylinder engine, along 6 with the group's first-ever lithium-ion battery pack.” 7 68. According to public sources, “[d]irectly behind the engine is a 33- 8 kilowatt (44-hp) motor-generator unit….” “Audi has dropped the transmission's 9 torque converter and replaced it with a multiplate clutch operating in an oil bath. 10 This clutch pack couples and de-couples the engine and electric motor.” “The 11 engine and transmission modifications ensure that all vehicle systems continue to 12 function even when the engine switches off, either at rest or during periods of 13 ‘gliding’ when the car is propelled only on electricity under light load at speeds up 14 to 62 miles per hour.” 15 69. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “[a]s an 16 intelligent vehicle system, [the Audi Q5 Hybrid’s] highly effective engine 17 management program can lower fuel consumption…by automatically shutting off 18 your engine while you wait at a red light or, perhaps, during certain stop-and-go 19 driving. Once you are ready to resume, or if other critical vehicle systems require it, 20 the engine will restart almost instantaneously.” 21 70. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “[t]he Q5 hybrid 22 features a unique hydraulic clutch between the engine and electric motor that 23 disengages the engine when you lift off the accelerator at highway cruising speeds. 24 The electric motor then takes over to propel the vehicle until more acceleration is 25 needed. Called ‘sailing,’ the benefit is a gain in highway fuel economy….” 26 71. According to public sources, the VW Jetta Hybrid “sandwiches an 27 electric motor between the internal combustion engine and the transmission. (It joins 28 the Touareg [H]ybrid in VW’s gas-electric stable.)” Similarly, “[t]he Touareg

19 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 20 of 33 Page ID #:221

1 Hybrid, which is VW's first-ever hybrid vehicle, uses a 3.0-liter supercharged and 2 direct injection V6 gasoline engine that is paired with an electric motor that 3 significantly reduces fuel consumption and emissions.” 4 72. According to public sources, “[w]hen you crank the “Touareg 5 [Hybrid’s] key, the petrol engine doesn’t fire up unless the batteries are low on 6 energy or, as we discovered on occasion in a freezing Wolfsburg, it is extremely 7 cold. Instead, the Touareg [H]ybrid wafts away solely on electric power. (¶ ) The 8 electric motor is powerful enough to provide the sole mode of propulsion for the 9 Touareg [H]ybrid up to 30mph. Yet when the engine kicks in the changeover is 10 barely perceptible.” 11 73. According to public sources, “[w]hen the driver releases the [Touareg 12 Hybrid’s] gas pedal, the engine will shut off while a special clutch disengages the 13 transmission from the engine, allowing it to ‘coast’ forward emission free without 14 electric or combustion power to further aid in fuel savings.” 15 74. According to public sources, “boosting the Touareg Hybrid's efficiency 16 is its unique ability to shut off the engine completely any time you take your foot off 17 the accelerator, at speeds of up to 99 mph. VW calls this "coasting" and it happens 18 by way of a clutch that decouples the engine from the transmission.” “[T]he 19 decoupling of the engine – the ‘sailing’ function – operates at any speed so, even 20 when driving in the city, the engine shuts down and the electric motor takes over 21 long before the car comes to a stop.” 22 75. In addition to their own direct infringement, Defendants have also been 23 and are inducing and/or contributing to the direct infringement of the ‘601 Patent by 24 at least, but not limited to, customers of Defendants, partners of Defendants, and/or 25 end-users of Defendants’ products, including, but not limited to, the ‘601 Patent 26 Accused Instrumentalities (“the ‘601 Patent Third Party Infringers”), who directly 27 implement, use or otherwise participate in the use of the ‘601 Patent Accused 28 Instrumentalities, which have no substantial non-infringing uses, by at least the

20 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 21 of 33 Page ID #:222

1 following affirmative acts: (1) advertising in public and marketing the features, 2 benefits and availability of the ‘601 Patent Accused Instrumentalities; (2) promoting 3 the adoption and use of the ‘601 Accused Instrumentalities; and (3) providing 4 instructions on how to use the ‘601 Patent Accused Instrumentalities. 5 76. Defendants indirectly infringe by actively, knowingly, and/or 6 intentionally inducing or contributing to infringement of one or more of the claims 7 of the ‘601 Patent, including, but not limited to, the ‘601 Patent Asserted Claims, by 8 a third party, including, but not limited to, the ‘601 Patent Third Party Infringers, 9 who directly implement, use or otherwise participate in the use of the ‘601 Patent 10 Accused Instrumentalities. On information and belief, Defendants actively, 11 knowingly, and/or intentionally induce the use of the ‘601 Patent Accused 12 Instrumentalities by the ‘601 Patent Third Party Infringers, and provide or otherwise 13 implement material components of one or more claims of the ‘601 Patent, including, 14 but not limited to, the ‘601 Patent Asserted Claims, which were especially made or 15 adapted for use in the infringement of the ‘601 Patent claims, including, but not 16 limited to, the ‘601 Patent Asserted Claims, and are not a staple article or 17 commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses. Defendants 18 know and have known that the combination for which their infringing components, 19 including, but not limited to, the ‘601 Patent Accused Instrumentalities, were 20 especially made or adapted are both patented and infringing. 21 77. Defendants’ infringement of the ‘601 Patent has been and continues to 22 be willful, rendering this case exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285. 23 With knowledge of the Patents-in-Suit, as described above, Defendants have 24 continued their infringing actions, as described above, despite an objectively high 25 likelihood (and affirmative allegations) that these actions constitute infringement of 26 the Patents-in-Suit. This objectively defined risk was known to Defendants, and so 27 obvious that it should have been known to Defendants. 28 78. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendants will continue to infringe on

21 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 22 of 33 Page ID #:223

1 the ‘601 Patent. 2 79. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff 3 has suffered, and will continue to suffer, irreparable injury for which it has no 4 adequate remedy at law. Plaintiff also has been damaged and, until an injunction 5 issues, will continue to be damaged in an amount yet to be determined. 6 FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 7 (Infringement of the ‘007 Patent) 8 80. Plaintiff incorporates all previous paragraphs of this complaint as if set 9 forth in full herein. 10 81. Signal IP is the owner of the entire right, title, and interest in and to 11 U.S. Patent No. 6,012,007 (the ‘007 Patent), entitled “Occupant Detection Method 12 and Apparatus for Air Bag System.” The ‘007 Patent was duly and legally issued by 13 the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on January 4, 2000. A true and correct copy 14 of the ‘007 Patent is attached as Exhibit E. 15 82. On information and belief, Defendants have been and are directly 16 infringing, inducing others to infringe, and/or contributorily infringing, literally, 17 under the doctrine of equivalents, and/or jointly, one or more claims of the ‘007 18 Patent, including, but not limited to, claims 1, 17, 19, 20, and 21 (“the ‘007 Patent 19 Asserted Claims”), in the State of California, in this judicial district, and elsewhere 20 in the United States by, among other things, importing, making, using, offering for 21 sale, and/or selling in the United States certain methods or systems disclosed and 22 claimed in the ‘007 Patent, including, but not limited to, Audi A3, A4, A4 Allroad, 23 A4 Sedan/Avant, A5, A6, A7, A8, Q3, Q5, Q7, R8, TT, Q5 Hybrid, S4, S5, S5 24 Cabriolet, S6, S7, S8, and SQ5, and the Volkswagen Beetle, Beetle Convertible, 25 Beetle Coupe, CC, Eos, Golf, Golf GTI, Golf R, Jetta, Jetta Sedan, Jetta 26 SportWagen, Passat Sedan, Passat Wagon, Tiguan, Touareg, Jetta Hybrid, and 27 Touareg Hybrid (collectively, the accused products and features are referred to 28 herein as “the ‘007 Patent Accused Instrumentalities,” although the accused

22 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 23 of 33 Page ID #:224

1 instrumentalities and asserted claims have been formally identified in Signal IP’s 2 Infringement Contentions). 3 83. The ‘007 Patent Accused Instrumentalities are described or have been 4 described at least in part online at: 5 http://www.audiusa.com/models/audi-a6/2014/A6-safety; 6 http://audiplanoparts.com/parts/2011/Audi/S5/Base?vehicleid=314392§ion=BO 7 DY%20HARDWARE&group=SEATS%20%26%20TRACKS&subgroup=FRONT 8 %20SEAT%20COMPONENTS&component=Occupant%20sensor&startrow=1&se 9 archtext=&siteid=217933&__utma=51557928.573099065.1394226656.1394226656 10 .1394226656.1&__utmb=51557928.12.10.1394226656&__utmc=51557928&__utm 11 x=- 12 &__utmz=51557928.1394226656.1.1.utmcsr=google%7Cutmccn=%28organic%29 13 %7Cutmcmd=organic%7Cutmctr=%28not%20provided%29&__utmv=- 14 &__utmk=243053126; 15 http://www.alkivar.com/AUDI/Audi_A4_2008_Owner_s_Manual.pdf; 16 http://www.euroncap.com/files/435_datasheet.pdf; 17 http://audi.service-bg.com/Articles/usermanuals/Audi-A4_A6_A8/Audi_B5_97- 18 2001/Body/Interior/69-40%20Airbag%20service.pdf; 19 http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/acms/cs/jaxrs/download/doc/UCM429697/RCDNN- 20 12V540-1944.pdf; and 21 http://www.volkspage.net/technik/ssp/ssp/SSP_361.pdf. 22 84. As described below and in the Infringement Contentions, Defendants 23 include a vehicle restraint system having a controller for deploying air bags and 24 means for selectively allowing deployment according to the outputs of seat sensors 25 responding to the weight of an occupant. Defendants determine measures 26 represented by individual sensor outputs and calculate from the sensor outputs a 27 relative weight parameter. Defendants establish a first threshold of the relative 28 weight parameter and allow deployment when the relative weight parameter is

23 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 24 of 33 Page ID #:225

1 above the first threshold. Defendants establish a lock threshold above the first 2 threshold and set a lock flag when the relative weight parameter is above the lock 3 threshold and deployment has been allowed for a given time. Defendants establish 4 an unlock threshold at a level indicative of an empty seat and clear the flag when the 5 relative weight parameter is below the unlock threshold for a time. Defendants 6 allow deployment while the lock flag is set. 7 85. FMVSS Standard No. 208 defines mandatory testing to ensure 8 occupant crash protection, including tests designed to ensure that airbags are not 9 deployed in a manner that would cause injury to infants, children, or small-statured 10 adults. NHTSA has not promulgated specific tests for rough road conditions, such 11 as tests designed to ensure that airbags do not turn off in the presence of a small- 12 statured adult who is bouncing as a result of riding on a rough road. However, 13 rough road performance is an area that all major vehicle manufacturers must 14 nonetheless consider and address in light of the full range of real world conditions 15 their vehicles will experience. See 16 http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/rulings/AAirBagSNPRM/Index.html. Thus, 17 Defendants require a mechanism to ensure due care in addressing the effect of rough 18 road and similar events on occupant presence. 19 86. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “[f]ront, side, 20 head curtain and knee airbags, along with front passenger occupant detection are 21 standard equipment in every A6 and S6” 22 87. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, “[i]f the airbag 23 control unit J234 receives the information that the front passenger seat is not 24 occupied or that a child seat is installed, the airbag control unit switches off the front 25 passenger airbag.” 26 88. More specifically, according to Defendants’ website or documentation, 27 “[t]he seat occupied recognition control unit J706 evaluates the signals from the 28 pressure sensor for seat occupied recognition G452 and seat belt force sensors for

24 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 25 of 33 Page ID #:226

1 seat occupied recognition G453. The signal from the seat belt force sensor for seat 2 occupied detection provides information on how high the tension force is on the seat 3 belt. Based on the signal from the pressure sensor for seat occupied recognition, the 4 seat occupied recognition control unit determines the load on the front passenger 5 seat. If the load is below approx. 20 kg and a very low or no belt force at all is 6 detected, the presence of a child seat is identified by the seat occupied recognition 7 control unit and communicated to the airbag control unit. The front passenger airbag 8 is deactivated by the airbag control unit. If the load on the seat is e.g. 25 kg [sic] and 9 the belt force exceeds a specified value, the seat occupied recognition control unit 10 recognises that additional pressure is being applied by the child seat onto the seat 11 cushion via the seat belt. The control unit recognises a the [sic] presence of a child 12 seat and the airbag control unit deactivates the front passenger air bag. Above a load 13 of approx. 25 kg and a low belt force, the seat occupied recognition control unit 14 assumes that the seat is occupied by an adult and the front passenger airbag remains 15 activated.” 16 89. According to Defendants’ website or documentation, the Audi front 17 passenger occupant detection system uses sensors in groups to detect the load in 18 different positions of the seat (as shown to the right). 19 Service personnel are instructed to “[t]est each sensor 20 group by pressing on them with your hand until [the] 21 display changes from ‘not occupied’ to ‘occupied’ 22 (max. load 12 kg).” 23 90. In addition to their own direct 24 infringement, Defendants have also been and are 25 inducing and/or contributing to the direct infringement of the ‘007 Patent by at least, 26 but not limited to, customers of Defendants, partners of Defendants, and/or end- 27 users of Defendants’ products, including, but not limited to, the ‘007 Patent Accused 28 Instrumentalities (“the ‘007 Patent Third Party Infringers”), who directly implement,

25 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 26 of 33 Page ID #:227

1 use or otherwise participate in the use of the ‘007 Patent Accused Instrumentalities, 2 which have no substantial non-infringing uses, by at least the following affirmative 3 acts: (1) advertising in public and marketing the features, benefits and availability of 4 the ‘007 Patent Accused Instrumentalities; (2) promoting the adoption and use of the 5 ‘007 Accused Instrumentalities; and (3) providing instructions on how to use the 6 ‘007 Patent Accused Instrumentalities. 7 91. Defendants indirectly infringe by actively, knowingly, and/or 8 intentionally inducing or contributing to infringement of one or more of the claims 9 of the ‘007 Patent, including, but not limited to, the ‘007 Patent Asserted Claims, by 10 a third party, including, but not limited to, the ‘007 Patent Third Party Infringers, 11 who directly implement, use or otherwise participate in the use of the ‘007 Patent 12 Accused Instrumentalities. On information and belief, Defendants actively, 13 knowingly, and/or intentionally induce the use of the ‘007 Patent Accused 14 Instrumentalities by the ‘007 Patent Third Party Infringers, and provide or otherwise 15 implement material components of one or more claims of the ‘007 Patent, including, 16 but not limited to, the ‘007 Patent Asserted Claims, which were especially made or 17 adapted for use in the infringement of the ‘007 Patent claims, including, but not 18 limited to, the ‘007 Patent Asserted Claims, and are not a staple article or 19 commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses. Defendants 20 know and have known that the combination for which their infringing components, 21 including, but not limited to, the ‘007 Patent Accused Instrumentalities, were 22 especially made or adapted are both patented and infringing. 23 92. Defendants’ infringement of the ‘007 Patent has been and continues to 24 be willful, rendering this case exceptional within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285. 25 With knowledge of the Patents-in-Suit, as described above, Defendants have 26 continued their infringing actions, as described above, despite an objectively high 27 likelihood (and affirmative allegations) that these actions constitute infringement of 28 the Patents-in-Suit. This objectively defined risk was known to Defendants, and so

26 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 27 of 33 Page ID #:228

1 obvious that it should have been known to Defendants. 2 93. Unless enjoined by this Court, Defendants will continue to infringe on 3 the ‘007 Patent. 4 94. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff 5 has suffered, and will continue to suffer, irreparable injury for which it has no 6 adequate remedy at law. Plaintiff also has been damaged and, until an injunction 7 issues, will continue to be damaged in an amount yet to be determined. 8 SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 9 (Infringement of the ‘775 Patent) 10 95. Plaintiff incorporates all previous paragraphs of this complaint as if set 11 forth in full herein. 12 96. Signal IP is the owner of the entire right, title, and interest in and to 13 U.S. Patent No. 5,954,775 (the ‘775 Patent), entitled “Dual Rate Communication 14 Protocol.” The ‘775 Patent was duly and legally issued by the U.S. Patent and 15 Trademark Office on September 21, 1999. A true and correct copy of the ‘775 16 Patent is attached as Exhibit G. 17 97. On information and belief, Defendants have been and are directly 18 infringing, inducing others to infringe, and/or contributorily infringing, literally, 19 under the doctrine of equivalents, and/or jointly, one or more claims of the ‘775 20 Patent, including, but not limited to, claim 6 (“the ‘775 Patent Asserted Claims”), in 21 the State of California, in this judicial district, and elsewhere in the United States by, 22 among other things, importing, making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling in the 23 United States certain methods or systems for vehicles disclosed and claimed in the 24 ‘775 Patent, including, but not limited to, the FlexRay communication protocol, 25 used in products including, but not limited to, the Audi A6, A7, and A8, and the 26 Bentley Arnage and Continental GT (collectively, the accused products and features 27 are referred to herein as “the ‘775 Patent Accused Instrumentalities”). 28 98. The ‘775 Patent Accused Instrumentalities are described or have been

27 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 28 of 33 Page ID #:229

1 described at least in part online at: 2 http://www.kneb.net/bmw/F01-02/03.1_F01%20Bus%20Systems.pdf; 3 http://www.eskorea.net/html/data/support/FlexRay2.0.pdf; 4 http://www.ece.cmu.edu/~ece649/lectures/23_flexray.pdf; 5 http://tx.technion.ac.il/~yakov/arko05date-final-version.pdf; 6 http://osg.informatik.tu-chemnitz.de/lehre/old/ws0809/sem/online/flexray.pdf; and 7 http://www.ida.liu.se/labs/eslab/publications/pap/db/unmbo_SIES12.pdf. 8 99. As described below and in the Infringement Contentions, Defendants’ 9 FlexRay Protocol accommodates communication of first and second types of data at 10 first and second message rates over a common communication link. FlexRay 11 establishes a message rate interval on the common communication link and devotes 12 a portion of each message rate interval to the first type of data and reserves a 13 remaining portion of each message rate interval for the second type of data. FlexRay 14 provides the first type of data at a first message rate sufficient to form a complete 15 message within the devoted portion of each message rate interval. FlexRay provides 16 the second type of data at a second message rate sufficient to form only a fragment 17 of a complete message in the remaining portion of each message rate interval, 18 thereby requiring a plurality of consecutive message rate intervals to form a 19 complete message of the second type of data. FlexRay transmits at least one of the 20 first and second types of data in the respective portions of each message rate 21 interval. 22 100. According to public information on the FlexRay System, “FlexRay is a 23 new communication system which aims at providing reliable and efficient data 24 transmission with real-time capabilities between the electrical and mechatronic 25 components for the purpose of interconnecting innovative functions in motor 26 vehicles…” FlexRay was developed by a consortium of Daimler, BMW AG, 27 Motorola and Philips, a consortium which was later joined by “almost all significant 28 car makers and suppliers throughout the world,” including Defendants.

28 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 29 of 33 Page ID #:230

1 101. According to public information on the FlexRay System, “[t]he 2 FlexRay bus system is a time-controlled bus system that additionally provides the 3 option of transmitting sections of the data transmission event-controlled. In the time- 4 controlled part, time slots are assigned to certain items of information. One time slot 5 is a defined period of time that is kept free for a specific item of information (e.g. 6 engine speed). Consequently, important periodic information is transmitted at a 7 fixed time interval in the FlexRay bus system so that the system cannot be 8 overloaded. Other less time-critical messages are transmitted in the event-controlled 9 part.” 10 102. According to public information on the FlexRay System, “[t]he 11 communication cycle is the fundamental element of the media access scheme within 12 FlexRay. It is defined by means of a timing hierarchy…[which] consists of four 13 timing hierarchy levels…. The highest level, the communication cycle level, defines 14 the communication cycle. It contains the static segment, the dynamic segment, the 15 symbol window and the network idle time (NIT).” 16 103. According to public information on the FlexRay System, “[t]he 17 communication cycle always contains a static segment.” “Of the communication 18 segments, the static part allows transmission of time-critical messages according to a 19 periodic cycle in which the system allocates time slots to nodes for the transmission 20 of their outgoing messages.” “In the static segment all communication slots are of 21 equal, statically configured duration and all frames are of equal, statically 22 configured length.” A communication slot is “an interval of time during which 23 access to a communication channel is granted exclusively to a specific node for the 24 transmission of a frame with a frame ID corresponding to the slot.” 25 104. According to public information on the FlexRay System, “[t]he 26 communication cycle may contain a dynamic segment.” “During this segment 27 access to the media is dynamically granted on a priority basis to nodes with data to 28 transmit.” “In the dynamic segment the duration of communication slots may vary

29 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 30 of 33 Page ID #:231

1 in order to accommodate frames of varying length.” “Within the dynamic segment a 2 set of consecutive dynamic slots that contain one or multiple minislots are 3 superimposed on the minislots. The duration of a dynamic slot depends on whether 4 or not communication, i.e. frame transmission or reception, takes place. The 5 duration of a dynamic slot is established on a per channel basis.… 6 • The dynamic slot consists of one minislot if no communication takes place on the 7 channel, i.e. the communication channel is in the channel idle state throughout the 8 corresponding minislot. 9 • The dynamic slot consists of multiple minislots if communication takes place on 10 the channel.” 11 However, the “[d]ynamic segment has a fixed amount of time” that “might or might 12 not be enough time for all dynamic messages to be sent,” so that “[w]hen [the] 13 dynamic segment time is up, unsent messages wait for next cycle.” 14 105. In addition to their own direct infringement, Defendants have also been 15 and are inducing and/or contributing to the direct infringement of the ‘775 Patent by 16 at least, but not limited to, customers of Defendants, partners of Defendants, and/or 17 end-users of Defendants’ products, including, but not limited to, the ‘775 Patent 18 Accused Instrumentalities (“the ‘775 Patent Third Party Infringers”), who directly 19 implement, use or otherwise participate in the use of the ‘775 Patent Accused 20 Instrumentalities, which have no substantial non-infringing uses, by at least the 21 following affirmative acts: (1) advertising in public and marketing the features, 22 benefits and availability of the ‘775 Patent Accused Instrumentalities; (2) promoting 23 the adoption and use of the ‘775 Accused Instrumentalities; and (3) providing 24 instructions on how to use the ‘775 Patent Accused Instrumentalities. 25 106. Defendants indirectly infringe by actively, knowingly, and/or 26 intentionally inducing or contributing to infringement of one or more of the claims 27 of the ‘775 Patent, including, but not limited to, the ‘775 Patent Asserted Claims, by 28 a third party, including, but not limited to, the ‘775 Patent Third Party Infringers,

30 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 31 of 33 Page ID #:232

1 who directly implement, use or otherwise participate in the use of the ‘775 Patent 2 Accused Instrumentalities. On information and belief, Defendants actively, 3 knowingly, and/or intentionally induce the use of the ‘775 Patent Accused 4 Instrumentalities by the ‘775 Patent Third Party Infringers, and provide or otherwise 5 implement material components of one or more claims of the ‘775 Patent, including, 6 but not limited to, the ‘775 Patent Asserted Claims, which were especially made or 7 adapted for use in the infringement of the ‘775 Patent claims, including, but not 8 limited to, the ‘775 Patent Asserted Claims, and are not a staple article or 9 commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing uses. Defendants 10 know and have known that the combination for which their infringing components, 11 including, but not limited to, the ‘775 Patent Accused Instrumentalities, were 12 especially made or adapted are both patented and infringing. 13 107. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff has 14 suffered irreparable injury for which it has no adequate remedy at law. Plaintiff also 15 has been damaged in an amount yet to be determined. 16 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 17 Wherefore, Signal IP respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment 18 against Defendants as follows: 19 1. That Defendants have directly infringed the Patents-in-Suit; 20 2. That Defendants have contributorily infringed the Patents-in-Suit; 21 3. That Defendants have induced the infringement of the Patents-in-Suit; 22 4. That Defendants’ infringement be adjudged willful and deliberate; 23 5. That Defendants and their affiliates, subsidiaries, officers, directors, 24 employees, agents, representatives, successors, assigns, and all those acting in 25 concert, participation, or privity with them or on their behalf, including customers, 26 be enjoined from infringing, inducing others to infringe or contributing to the 27 infringement of the Patents-in-Suit; 28 6. For damages, according to proof, for Defendants’ infringement,

31 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 32 of 33 Page ID #:233

1 together with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, as allowed by law and that 2 such damages be trebled as provided by 35 U.S.C. § 284; 3 7. That this Court determine that this is an exceptional case under 35 4 U.S.C. § 285 and an award of attorneys’ fees and costs to Signal IP is warranted; 5 and 6 8. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 7 8 Dated: July 11, 2014 LINER LLP 9

10 By: 11 /s/ Ryan E. Hatch Randall J. Sunshine 12 Ryan E. Hatch 13 Jason L. Haas Attorneys for Plaintiff SIGNAL IP, INC. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

32 Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Case 2:14-cv-03113-JAK-JEM Document 34 Filed 07/11/14 Page 33 of 33 Page ID #:234

1 JURY DEMAND 2 Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 38(b), Plaintiff Signal 3 IP, Inc. respectfully demands a jury trial on any and all issues triable as of right 4 by a jury in this action. 5 Dated: July 11, 2014 LINER LLP 6 7

8 By: /s/ Ryan E. Hatch 9 Randall J. Sunshine Ryan E. Hatch 10 Jason L. Haas 11 Attorneys for Plaintiff SIGNAL IP, INC.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Case No. LA CV14-03113 JAK (JEMx) FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT